The thing about Adam's video that got my attention was the assertion the low setback was due to 180 mm cranks. With his height if he had 175 mm cranks that would be normal, but his saddle is more than 5mm forward of center rail. It rather seems he's taking a triathlete rotate-forward position: hips forward, shoulders forward, arms down. Kraig Willett evaluated that for area reduction and concluded benefits are relatively small unless you were to take it to extremes.

The thing about Adam's video that got my attention was the assertion the low setback was due to 180 mm cranks. With his height if he had 175 mm cranks that would be normal

I`m 180 cm, what cranklength should I use?

djconnel wrote:

, but his saddle is more than 5mm forward of center rail. It rather seems he's taking a triathlete rotate-forward position: hips forward, shoulders forward, arms down. Kraig Willett evaluated that for area reduction and concluded benefits are relatively small unless you were to take it to extremes.

Are there any other benefits than "area reduction"(or the following run)?

The thing about Adam's video that got my attention was the assertion the low setback was due to 180 mm cranks. With his height if he had 175 mm cranks that would be normal

I`m 180 cm, what cranklength should I use?

djconnel wrote:

, but his saddle is more than 5mm forward of center rail. It rather seems he's taking a triathlete rotate-forward position: hips forward, shoulders forward, arms down. Kraig Willett evaluated that for area reduction and concluded benefits are relatively small unless you were to take it to extremes.

Are there any other benefits than "area reduction"(or the following run)?

Cranklength is generally considered to be a comfort thing: whatever you feel good with is best. Once you get past an adaptation period, changes in crank length in the relatively 165 to 190 range don't affect power much in lab settings. It's a matter of what works well for your legs.

Who cares if his explanation makes sense- it works. Its like Cav saying he drops his seat in the mountains and raises his bars- neither of these things improves his climbing or efficiency, but he manages to still make the time cuts (although he struggles).

What is crazy to me is the seat height on there. It looks absurdly high and despite the seat being more forward, seat height is basically a radius from the bb to where the rider sits so more forward does not necessarily equal that much higher. Looking at videos his toes are super pointed downwards and always on the very nose of the saddle, which would suggest that distance from the two is huge.

Just wondering out loud- why is Tyler Farrar still on Garmin other than contract reasons? He rarely wins anything at the top level or against top notch competition. Last year he lost to 3rd rank domestic pros on numerous occasions and clearly has not lived up to the early hype/results he had in 2009. He doesn't seem capable of winning a monument (even Milan San Remo), doesn't have the raw power to beat out really any top sprinter and doesn't have the snap of Cav, Guardini, or Modolo so why would he still be of value to Garmin? I'm guessing he doesn't have many UCI points as a result of this either so I'm confused as to why they wouldn't try to find some better talent in that regard.

Has anyone else found themselves smiling at all of the discussion surrounding Zakeen's "radical" fit and choice of equipment?He is a WW member, by the way. A forum which is known to encourage pushing beyond the base-level of accepted practices and experiment with both fit and equipment setups. You guys have heard of this "Weight Weenies" forum, right?

>runs slimmer bars>seat replicates TT positions>full pedal stroke with ankle rotation>doesn't really care what others think>uses exercise equipment that may not be accepted by others to his own degree of success

Yah, I think Haussler is overrated but he's actually been up there in classics and had a lot of formidable results in non-sprint situations. You could make a much better case for him than you can for keeping Farrar around. I wondered because from a team management perspective he makes no sense- no results, no points, and little all around utility. Haussler can ride in breakaways successfully and hang on through the mountains better and has even been a solid leadout man before. He can be up there in monuments and the potential is there despite my opinion of him overall. This is approaching it purely from a DS/management perspective, not on whether or not I personally like someone.

but haussler went down a notch from WT to continental right? maybe garmin just wants to tick the 'we have an american sprinter' box.... no idea. I will forever have this image of farrar rushing onto argos' team bus engrained into my mind.... so many lolz.

Who is online

You cannot post new topics in this forumYou cannot reply to topics in this forumYou cannot edit your posts in this forumYou cannot delete your posts in this forumYou cannot post attachments in this forum